Angelo, as I explained in [1], you don't have to use XSL-FO when using Apache FOP. It supports alternative means to create PDFs.
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-odf-dev/201108.mbox/%[email protected]%3E But of course, Apache PDFBox would profit a lot from a higher-level PDF production API. Any contributions are more than welcome. On 05.09.2011 10:56:20 Angelo zerr wrote: > Hi Jukka, > > Thank a lot for you answer. I have already implemented a docx->PDF and > odt->PDF converters with FOP but I decided to give up for : > > * performance reason. I have used XSLT cache, use xsl:key to compute the > odt/docx styles but the FOP implementation is less performant than iText > implementation, because : > * FOP process : odt -> XSLT -> FO -> FOP > * iText process : odt -> ODFDOM (Java) -> iText > * xslt vs Java model : with the iText process, your model is Java, although > with FOP your model is XML. I prefer develop Java instead of XSLT. > > That's why I'm searching Java PDF API like PDFBox to replace iText to > provides our code to Apache. > > Regards Angelo > > 2011/9/5 Jukka Zitting <[email protected]> > > > Hi Angelo, > > > > On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Angelo zerr <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > I suppose that my post was not well explained as I have no answer. I will > > be > > > very happy to use PDFBox in our XDocReport converter (docx-> PDF and > > odt-> > > > PDF) but develop converter is a big work and I can not investiaget time > > if I > > > have no support. > > > > There's been some interest in making it easier to use PDFBox to > > generate complex new PDF documents, but so far the main use cases have > > been simpler. You might want to look at Apache FOP > > (http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/) for a higher-level PDF generation > > tool. > > > > BR, > > > > Jukka Zitting > > Jeremias Maerki
